Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm another one that has used Fusion from early on and has never once HAD to upgrade because of a new MacOS, though maybe for better support for a new Windows version. With the APFS change I am not going to take any chances. I will be upgrading most of my utility type apps this time around.

I too used Parallels at first and have gone back to check them out periodically, but Fusion is so much less invasive on the Mac side. I also need to use a lot of goofy I/O devices via USB and even USB>Serial adapters and Fusion has always been much more reliable for that. Add that I could port machines between Fusion and Workstation and even ESX and it's a no brainer.
 
This is slightly off topic but I am running VMWare Fusion 8.5.8 on both my iMac and my late 2013 MBPr. It works great on my iMac. However, because of storage limitations on my MBPr, I had to move VMWare Fusion to a 128 GB Transcend SD drive that I leave permanently installed in my MBPr. This worked fine for a while but now Windows is unusably slow (literally, it takes over 10 minutes to launch a program in Windows on my MBPr while the same program launches in about 2 seconds in Windows on my iMac).

Has anyone else run into this problem? I am sure moving VMWare Fusion to the Transcend SD drive slowed it down some but it was usable for over a year before the responsiveness took such a nose dive that it is now unusable.
If you are really running t on an SD card, that would be why. They are not designed to be used like an SSD with constant read/writes (you could probably store things like documents/music/movies on it though). You might have just worn it out.
 
If you are really running t on an SD card, that would be why. They are not designed to be used like an SSD with constant read/writes (you could probably store things like documents/music/movies on it though). You might have just worn it out.
Thank you for your reply. I did not realize that. I knew it was immediately slower than running off my SSD but it was "acceptably" slower for quite a while before it really slowed down. I knew SDs had a finite number of read/write cycles but I never thought that using it in this way might wear it out so quickly. Looks like I may have to buy a bigger SSD and move it from my SD. Thank you.
 
I run 7.1.3 - on El Capitan.
Thinking about upgrading to HS, when it comes out.

I run no Windows, so the various improvements they touted for every release since then haven't really enticed me to upgraded.
If 7.1.3 doesn't run on HS, that might just be the reason to upgrade...
 
I have had a MacBook for a couple of months now, I love love love the Touch Bar and use it hundreds of times a day. I've never once used it to pick an emoticon.
I've never heard anyone call it an "emoticon bar". Emoticon and Emoji are not two different names for the same thing. Emoticons are smiley faces made out of sequences of text characters (mostly punctuation), which originated on Arpanet and Usenet (predecessors of the Internet) in the early 80's, while Emoji are little special-purpose graphical symbols of faces and such, that originated from Japanese cell phones in the late 90's (originally with incompatible implementations on each carrier). Use of Emoji has since expanded considerably and they have therefore (quite reasonably) been added to the official Unicode character set standard which has been repeatedly amended with still more Emoji (because people keep saying, "if we have Emoji for X and Y, surely we should also have Z" - I don't agree with this logic, but it appears to be a bell we can't unring).

And every time the Unicode Consortium adds new Emoji to the Unicode standard, and Apple implements the latest Unicode standard (as it should - it is the standard for how to represent all text in a uniform way), and MacRumors posts about it, a certain contingent of MacRumors readers have a conniption, because the graphic artists at Apple who drew the graphics for the latest Emoji should clearly be building the next MacBook instead. These readers have built up a long hatred for Emoji, so, since the Touch Bar on the latest laptops can show Emoji, what better way to channel their rage than by dubbing it the "Emoji Bar".

I have an entirely different reason to dislike the Touch Bar - as an old-school Unix programmer, I need an Escape key, because I use it thousands of times a day (mostly in Vim/MacVim). It has to work without looking, it has to work every time, and it's much better if it gives tactile feedback that: a) you're touching the key but you haven't pressed it yet; and, b) yep, you've pressed it now. The touch bar fails on both of these - there is no distinction between touching the virtual Escape key and using it (you can't rest your finger on it waiting for the right moment to press it), and there's no tactile feedback that you have indeed pressed it (i.e. pressing to the right of the "key" and getting either nothing, or whatever icon happens to appear there at the moment, feels exactly the same as "pressing" the Escape "key"). If they had a physical Escape key at the left end of the bar, TouchID at the right end, and their touch strip in between, I'd be fine with that, but a virtual Escape key is a mediocre substitute for a physical Escape key. (Non-programmers may not see this as a big deal - imagine if they eventually went to an entirely touch bar keyboard on the Mac - it would open up fabulous possibilities for gestures and key reassignment based on current context, and it would completely kill touch typing, you'd have to look at your hands while you type instead of at the screen.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: John.B
Great. VMware Fusion is the only one that works to control machines via USB from Windows on Mac.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjinsjca
Thank you for your reply. I did not realize that. I knew it was immediately slower than running off my SSD but it was "acceptably" slower for quite a while before it really slowed down. I knew SDs had a finite number of read/write cycles but I never thought that using it in this way might wear it out so quickly. Looks like I may have to buy a bigger SSD and move it from my SD. Thank you.
My guess is actually that the card has filled up from all the small writes from running an OS (not that the VM is actually filling the card, just data that the OS says is deleted but isn't yet really) and the card is now having to do garbage collection at the same time as writing and that is what is bringing things to a crawl. SD cards are just not as good at that as a real SSD. Formatting the card may return the speed temporarily.
 
Someone asked about Snow Leopard, so I'll share my experience. Snow Leopard Server can be run successfully on VMware Fusion Pro 8.5.8. So can regular Snow Leopard if you know how to fool Fusion into believing it's the server version.

As for APFS, I've converted my virtual disk of a High Sierra virtual machine (running on Fusion Pro 8.5.8) to APFS. No problems so far.
 
An emulated TPM wouldn't make sense. The entire point of a TPM is to have a key store which problems in your OS can't compromise. Meanwhile, a hypervisor (the generic term for virtualization environments like VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop) exists solely to trick a system into thinking it has exclusive access to real hardware when it's actually using software or arbitrated access to hardware.

If they were to add TPM functionality, where would they store the keys? In a real TPM? That would mean you couldn't move the VM from one machine to another. On top of that, real TPMs have limited capacity; you wouldn't be able to run more than a handful of VMs.

In software? Then a problem in the host OS could leak the guest's key data. There's a whole class of exploits called "guest escape exploits". They are used from inside a VM to escape from the VM and gain control over the host running it. These have not been an area of really deep research yet, but people keep finding guest escape flaws in every hypervisor system so far. This would let an attacker in the guest get access to both the encrypted data in the guest and to the keys by escaping the guest and reading the TPM state from the host.

Your question isn't a bad one. It's just one of the things virtualization will never be able to do safely without major tradeoffs.

Hi there,

Fusion Product Manager here...
Allow me to clear up some misconceptions in this post.

We do have a virtual TPM device. It absolutely makes sense because it's a requirement for Microsoft VBS which we now support in a VM.

The keys are stored in a secure location, encrypted, and inaccessible to the host. It's developed by the vSphere team, so it's designed with Enterprise security requirements in mind.

'Guest Escape' is actually a very complicated thing. No one can 'just do it', you have to string many MANY different 0-day vulnerabilities together. The showcases at Pwn2Own and other competitions are cool but they could almost never be used in the real world. Especially since after they show off the hack they are obligated to tell us how they did it and we respond by patching in usually a couple of days.

The Host OS can not leak the guest TPM key data. Again, vSphere uses this feature, there are military grade compliance requirements baked into the platform. Literally, we sell to 3-letter agencies quite a bit.

So I think the notion that virtualization will 'never' be able to do is inaccurate, we're already doing it and we're doing it in a way that is secure enough for the most regulated of environments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whg
What DirectX version will this version support? Up until now they only support v9 whilst DX10 has been out since 30 January 2007, DX11 since October 27, 2009 and DX12 since March 20, 2014. Thus effectively over 10 years out of date, to date.
Actually, your information are out of date: VMware offers finalised DirectX 10 support for about two years, and experimentally even longer.* DX11 support was so far not possible due to the shortcomings of Apple's OpenGL version. It remains to be seen whether Metal can change that.

(* But to be honest: they were rather late with that, as Parallels implemented DX10 support much earlier.)
 
So I'm a recent VMware convert from Parallels, maybe 9 months or less. Parallels upgrades, plus changing to one license per machine wasn't fun with an iMac and MacBook. So I made the switch. Anyone know if Fusion 8.5 will run in High Sierra? Would rather skip this version if I can.

It will probably work hence with no support for High Sierra specific functionality.

I've been using VMware and upgrading only every second version for years and it has worked well for me (they allow upgrade pricing when you are one version behind, but don't get two versions behind or you will have to pay the full price again).
 
My guess is actually that the card has filled up from all the small writes from running an OS (not that the VM is actually filling the card, just data that the OS says is deleted but isn't yet really) and the card is now having to do garbage collection at the same time as writing and that is what is bringing things to a crawl. SD cards are just not as good at that as a real SSD. Formatting the card may return the speed temporarily.
Thank you. I may give that a try (back up the SD card to an external drive, reformat, then put the it back on the SD. I don't use Windows very much, there is just 1 program (Minitab) that is only available for Windows and I need to be able to run that program from time to time on my MBPr.
 
So, the rumours from one or two years ago that VMware had dissolved the Fusion team and was withdrawing from the Mac virtualisation market weren't quite accurate.


At VMworld last year they basically said those rumors were untrue and they were just refocussing some of their efforts to other areas. They also admitted they didn't have enough new features to warrant a new release and charge for it but did announce then that they would have a new version this year. Normally they hand out licenses to the attendees for that session even though it isn't released to the public yet. Hopefully they do again this year.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Stenik
I'm currently running Bootcamp on a mid 2011 i7 MacBook Air w/ 4GB ram and 256SSD. Do you guys think I can run this on that machine effectively? I barely use the Windows 10 Bootcamp at this point but I'm do need to have a Windows 10 machine around for work "just in case".
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering, what does Parallels get you that VirtualBox does not? VirtualBox is free and the performance seems good enough for most things.
If you've ever been a heavy user of virtualization, you'd find that VirtualBox has suffered from a number of stability issues over the years, some of them bringing down the entire system thanks to the VBox kernel extension, although normally just the VM crashes. I've experienced these issues routinely enough over the years, that I no longer use it. They obviously need to test their code better. Switching to VMWare was the best thing I ever did. Yes, it cost money, but it has NEVER crashed on me. It certainly hasn't ever brought the system down. It's a very stable piece of software, without a doubt.

Plus, if you're a tech like me, VMWare is used quite heavily in the industry. Using VMWare Fusion gives me some of the same technologies used in their enterprise products, so it's good practice. :)
 
Not even counting all the virtual appliances that run on VMware. Things like Kerio's software phone system, or their mail server. Yes they are based on Linux, but they are very streamlined for a single purpose.
 
I switched to Fusion this April because I was annoyed of the yearly Parallels updates and now this... At least there was a discount code for Parallels switchers and I only payed 53.37 instead of 88.95€.

Just saw they still offer it:

http://store.vmware.com/sstore?Acti...EUR&id=ProductDetailsPage&productID=323414900

But Parallels 11 is also still working fine on High Sierra and they offer at least two times a year a bundle for the upgrade price what includes at least two apps that are purchased alone more expensive each than a Parallels upgrade, like PDF Expert, Text Expander, 1Password etc. and you get the discounted upgrade price for the last two versions.

I found last last year's bundles for Parallels 12:

https://www.parallels.com/black-friday-bundle
https://www.parallels.com/parallels-mac-holiday-bundle

I got 1Password 6 and PDF Expert 2 and something else for the upgrade from 10 to 11 and both are more expensive each than the upgrade had been.


Edit: Since I only use a VM every few months. I'll switch to Virtual Box or the other free one which name I always forget when the others stop working without an upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Any word on 7.1.3 -> 10 upgrades?
Yep, v7 to v10 upgrades will be allowed
[doublepost=1503460071][/doublepost]
I'm currently running Bootcamp on a mid 2001 i7 MacBook Air w/ 4GB ram and 256SSD. Do you guys think I can run this on that machine effectively? I barely use the Windows 10 Bootcamp at this point but I'm do need to have a Windows 10 machine around for work "just in case".
If by 2001 you meant 2011, then yes this Mac is supported.

The new hypervisor platform requires newer CPU instruction sets, so Mac's older than around 2009 probably won't work. We'll have an exhaustive list comping out to coincide with the general availability.
 
You don't have to upgrade. An older VMware version has been running fine on newer macOS releases in the past, I don't see why 8.5 would be different. If you don't see any immediate value in the added features then there's no need to rush the upgrade.

Also, previous years have shown that a promo code or discount for VMware will pop up around Black Friday, so you will be able to get some % off the upgrade price if you want to upgrade, but hold off for a few weeks.

You just need a good backup and restore tool that supports bare metal recovery like Shadow Protect and their hardware independent restore. I have used that multiple times to move between parallels, VMware and boot camp.
[doublepost=1503467053][/doublepost]
I've used VMWare since they first went into business, but this year I finally switched to Parallels. I hate the subscription model, but overall the product works really well, and disk I/O is WAY faster than VMWare Fusion. Orders of magnitude faster. I can compile code 6-7 times faster. So until VMWare Fusion addresses the significant disk speed gap, there's no comparison.

Same here. Graphics performance and disk I/O for software development are way faster in Parallels. I have had some odd keyboard issues with Parallels and tried to go back to VMware a few times most recently for v8.5 and it was terrible. Gave up after a few days. If they could fix that to make disk I/O faster and the graphics not super slow I would give it another try.
 
That list includes about 85 entries for Linux, a handful for BSD, plus one each for ReactOS and Solaris. That's four. What about the other 96 OSes?
Linux is a kernel; there is no "Linux OS". A Linux distribution contains a Linux kernel, a software stack and, although not always, a desktop environment. They are not the same; try to install a .deb file on Red Hat system or an .RPM on a Debian based system.
If you don't agree with this definition then macOS is just a BSD derivative as Darwin is a BSD kernel.
Besides what do you think VMware guys were referring to?
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.